Navigation
Students explore the 'close reading' method, focusing on the internal mechanics of a text rather than external context.
If a poet wrote a masterpiece while intending to describe a sunset, but every word in the text actually describes a bloody revolution, who is right: the author or the poem?
In the early 20th century, Formalism and New Criticism revolutionized how we read. Before this, critics often focused on an author's life or the historical era. New Critics argued that a poem is an autotelic object—it contains its own meaning and purpose. Think of a poem like a complex watch; to understand it, you don't need to know the watchmaker's childhood. You only need to see how the gears (words, rhythm, and imagery) grind against each other to tell time. This method, known as Close Reading, treats the text as a self-contained universe where every comma and vowel shift matters.
Quick Check
According to New Criticism, where is the 'true' meaning of a text located?
Answer
The meaning is located exclusively within the internal structure and language of the text itself, not in the author's life or historical context.
One of the most radical pillars of New Criticism is the Intentional Fallacy, a term coined by W.K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley. They argued that the author's intention is 'neither available nor desirable' as a standard for judging a work. Once a poem is published, it belongs to the public language. If a writer intended to be funny but the text is objectively tragic, the critic must treat it as a tragedy. To rely on the author's 'plan' is a logical error because the text must stand or fall on its own merits. We judge the painting, not the painter's diary.
1. Consider a poem about a 'cold, white morning.' 2. The author later writes in a letter: 'I wrote this to represent my joy at a new beginning.' 3. However, the poem uses words like 'shroud,' 'numb,' and 'void.' 4. A Formalist would ignore the letter and conclude the poem is about death or isolation, as the internal evidence outweighs the author's external claim.
Quick Check
Why would a New Critic ignore an interview where an author explains their book's meaning?
Answer
Because of the Intentional Fallacy; the author's external goals are irrelevant to the objective linguistic evidence found within the text.
How does a text hold itself together? New Critics like Cleanth Brooks argued that great literature achieves Organic Unity through tension. Unlike a scientific report, which seeks literal clarity, literature thrives on Paradox (statements that seem contradictory but reveal a truth) and Irony (the alignment of contradictory meanings). These devices create a 'pressure' that gives the text its shape. A poem isn't just a 'message' wrapped in pretty words; the form is the meaning. This led to the 'Heresy of Paraphrase'—the idea that you cannot summarize a poem's meaning without destroying the poem itself.
1. Identify a Paradox: In John Donne's poetry, he asks God to 'batter my heart' so he can be 'made new.' 2. Analyze the Irony: Destruction is usually the opposite of creation. 3. Observe the Unity: The violent verbs (, , ) create a cohesive pattern of 'sacred violence' that defines the poem's internal logic, regardless of Donne's personal religious history.
Analyze a single stanza using only internal mechanics: 1. Map the Phonetic Patterns: Do harsh 'k' sounds create a sense of conflict? 2. Identify Ambiguity: Does a specific word have two meanings that create a productive tension? 3. Synthesize: Show how the rhyme scheme (form) reinforces the thematic irony (content). For instance, a rigid rhyme scheme paired with a theme of 'chaos' creates a paradox of 'controlled madness.'
Which of the following would a New Critic most likely use to analyze a poem?
What is the 'Heresy of Paraphrase'?
The 'Intentional Fallacy' suggests that if a writer didn't mean for a symbol to be there, the critic shouldn't analyze it.
Review Tomorrow
In 24 hours, try to explain the 'Intentional Fallacy' to someone else using the 'watch and watchmaker' analogy.
Practice Activity
Pick a short poem you've never read. Write a 200-word analysis without looking up the author's name or the date it was written. Focus only on how the words interact.